Same-Sex Marriage Comes to Washington D.C.
A bill legalizing same-sex marriage in Washington D.C. was signed into law by D.C. Mayor Adrian M. Fenty in December last year. D.C., being a federal district, has its laws reviewed by Congress before they go into effect. The period of time Congress had to review the same-sex marriage legislation expired yesterday, and so today was the first day marriage licenses were issued to gay and lesbian couples.
Washington D.C. also permits voters to block legislation pending a referendum on the issue, but anything that violates the D.C. Human Rights Act is exempted from this policy. The United States Supreme Court decided today in a three-page ruling that the same-sex marriage law was covered by the Human Rights Act exemption. Therefore, the Court refused to grant the petitioners' request to stay the new legislation.
While the life of legal same-sex marriage in Washington D.C. is dependent on the eventual referendum vote, marriage licenses are now available to D.C. couples.
[Via The Associated Press]
Have a question, comment, or response? 1 person does.
Maryland Now Recognizes Out-of-State Same-Sex Marriages
Maryland Attorney General Douglas Gansler has announced that Maryland will immediately begin recognizing same-sex marriages performed in other states. While this does not mean that Maryland same-sex couples will be able to wed in the state, it does mean that couples who are married in other jurisdictions — such as New England neighbors Massachusetts, New Hampshire, or Vermont — will receive all of the state rights and privileges associated with marriage in Maryland.
New York's highest court reached a similar decision in late 2009.
Have a question, comment, or response? Share your thoughts.
CA Gubernatorial Candidate Meg Whitman on Same-Sex Rights
Meg Whitman, former eBay CEO and 2010 Republican gubernatorial candidate in California, has been the subject of numerous recent headlines for her political ambitions in the nation's most populous state. California, still reeling from the effects of Proposition 8 that stopped the state from performing same-sex marriages, will be replacing current Republican governor Arnold Schwarzenegger. Schwarzenegger vetoed the California legislature's attempts to enact same-sex marriage in the state, citing constitutional issues with the attempt, but also opposed Proposition 8.
Meg Whitman granted two interviews, one with Silicon Valley's Mercury News and one with the Los Angeles Times, to discuss her political positions. Describing her political lean as "moderate to conservative" on social issues, Whitman believes that same-sex couples should be permitted to enter into civil unions and adopt children, but that the word "marriage" should be restricted to opposite-sex couples. Whitman supported Proposition 8, calling it a "matter of personal conscience and my faith." Whitman stood out, however, for her belief that Proposition 8 should not apply retroactively, and that the same-sex marriages legally performed before Proposition 8 should still be recognized and valid in the state.
While Family Fairness takes no position on whether Whitman would be a worthy governor for the state of California, it believes that California voters — especially those who believe strongly in the rights of same-sex couples — should be informed about the candidates' stances toward the LGBT community. For more on Meg Whitman's political positions, consult her Meg Whitman for Governor homepage.
Have a question, comment, or response? Share your thoughts.
For Richer Or Poorer: Advice for Couples Planning on a Worry-Free Future
This is a guest post from Robert A. Dienelt, a Financial Advisor and Accredited Asset Management Specialist (AAMS) from Jackson, Mississippi. While Family Fairness usually discusses the legal side of family planning, Robert will be talking about financial considerations all couples should make before marrying, registering their civil union or domestic partnership, or using legal documents to grant their partners rights.
Every spousal financial relationship is unique. Through the years, couples develop their own systems for handling financial matters. Sometimes it is one partner's responsibility to manage all finances, sometimes the other's, and sometimes a combination. Whatever the situation, certain information should be shared.
Couples should consider mutual responsibility for and knowledge of:
- Retirement plans: Take time to fully acquaint each other with employer retirement benefits. Both partners should have current knowledge of pension plans, 401(k) accounts, and IRAs. For a complete picture of expected retirement benefits, become familiar with each other's Social Security benefits as well. Understanding retirement benefit information will bring clarify and facilitate retirement planning.
- Credit card documents: This one can be scary. Some may prefer to not know how much credit card debt their spouse has accumulated. But it's wise to know where to find account numbers in case one loses his or her wallet and needs the other to help cancel the card. Also, mutual awareness of credit card debt amounts will help with developing a family's overall financial plan.
- Power of attorney: It is generally a good idea to have power of attorney on any individually owned assets, just in case one partner becomes ill or otherwise unavailable. Power of attorney can be limited to specific functions for a certain period, such as selling stocks or withdrawing money while traveling. A broad document that authorizes each partner to handle almost any situation in the other's absence is also a consideration.
- Wills, trusts, and life insurance: It's especially important to share information about wills, trusts, and life insurance if either has been married before. There could be restrictions on how some assets may be used and beneficiaries left unchanged by mistake. Most important, make sure each partner knows where to find the will and can easily access it if something were to happen.
- Health insurance policies: Most insurance companies will cover care administered in the first 24 to 48 hours of a medical emergency, even if the coverage details have not been sorted out. But the situation isn't as clear with hospital visits that are less urgent. If each partner is covered under a different insurance plan, both should be familiarized with the requirement "hoops" they may have to jump through. If one spouse had a sudden illness, would the other know which doctor to call first to get an okay for treatment? If not, they risk running up big bills at an out-of-network doctor.
- Business loans: If one spouse owns a business or is a partner in a professional firm, both should know about any personally guaranteed loans. It is critical to be aware of liabilities since household assets can be hit if the business can't repay the loan.
While many don't necessarily need to know everything about their spouse's finances, maintaining a working knowledge of the above points can help maintain proper, balanced control over a family's financial affairs.
Have a question, comment, or response? Share your thoughts.
The Gay Tax: How the Estate Tax Marital Deduction Costs Same-Sex Couples $3.3 Million
The Williams Institute of UCLA School of Law has released a study [pdf] that shows that same-sex couples are assessed an average of $3.3 million more in taxes upon the death of their partner than a similarly situated opposite-sex couple. Because estate taxes are set federally, the Defense of Marriage Act prohibits even married same-sex couples from taking advantage of the marital deduction.
Says Michael D. Steinberger, the author of the study:
Even in 2010, when the estate tax is currently slated to be repealed, federal law allows different-sex married couples to shelter an additional $3 million in capital gains when a partner dies. Regardless of your views about this tax, it is a costly implication of legal discrimination against gay and lesbian couples.
The study also estimated that if the current laws are not changed, gay and lesbian couples will have lost more than $3.5 billion in the decade preceding 2011. Steinberger advises that: "As Congress turns to legislation in December to address the estate tax before it disappears in 2010, it should address these inequalities for same-sex couples and their families."
The cost to provide equal benefits to same-sex couples would be one twentieth of one percent (.05%) of the total federal government revenue.
The full study, Federal Estate Tax Disadvantages for Same-Sex Couples [pdf], is available at the Williams Institute website.
Have a question, comment, or response? Share your thoughts.
What Will the Affordable Health Care for America Act do for LGBT Families?
The House of Representatives yesterday passed the health reform bill, the Affordable Health Care for America Act, by a vote of 220-215. The Wall Street Journal reports the several key provisions of the bill including capping health insurance costs for low- and middle-income families, creating a program for individuals to find policies—including a government-run public option—disallowing insurance companies to drop coverage for pre-existing conditions, and requiring certain employers to provide more comprehensive coverage. The bill also includes a few provisions designed to help gay and lesbian individuals and their families.
The Human Rights Campaign has identified several important, new benefits for LGBT Americans. The two most key among them:
Unequal Taxation of Domestic Partner Benefits – the bill ends the unfair taxation of employer-provided domestic partner health benefits, incorporating the language of the Tax Equity for Health Plan Beneficiaries Act. Without this tax penalty, more people will be able to afford employer-provided coverage for their families, and more companies will be able to offer these important benefits.
Non-discrimination – the bill prohibits consideration of personal characteristics unrelated to the provision of health care. HRC worked with a coalition of civil rights groups to develop and lobby for this language and we believe it will help protect LGBT people from discrimination in the health care system, where there are currently no federal protections for our community.
The Tax Equity for Health Plan Beneficiaries Act addresses the problem that, although employer-provided health insurance coverage for spouses is tax exempt, domestic partners must pay income tax on the benefits they receive from their partner's employer. If the bill becomes law, domestic partners will no longer pay this additional, inequitable tax.
HRC further reports that the bill "designates LGBT people as a health disparities population" giving our community data collection and grant programs that focus on the health issues related to sexual orientation and gender identity. It also extends Medicaid coverage to early HIV treatment, and funds comprehensive sex education.
The future is uncertain, with the vote of the Senate still required on their version of the bill, approval of both chambers on a final, synthesized version, and President Obama's signature. While the President has indicated his intent to sign, and is "absolutely confident" that the bill will pass the Senate, according to CNN, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid remains uncertain, while Senator Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut promises a filibuster of any bill containing a public option.
Have a question, comment, or response? 1 person does.